3 ms·
Well you did make me ask how the interpreter works in this area. So in a way your article did work.
by richardjam73 4y ago
Well you did make me ask how the interpreter works in this area. So in a way your article did work.
- masswerk 4y agoHappy that it worked, somehow. ;-) (Also, I've to emphasize, the apparent scandal is not related to gender. Just as a thought experiment: Humans tend to anthropomorphize objects they are interacting with. At this point, it becomes nearly impossible to relate to structure, if there is even the least resemblance, regardless of alleged gender. "He had a mark on the left of his two…", is equally scandalous as is, "she had a mark on the left of her two…". The scandal is more fundamental than this. Meaning, we can't express care for and/or interest in an object and address its structure at the same time, and still avoid this kind of scandal. Anthropomorphic terminology or jargon doesn't help.)
- altairprime 4y agoUnderstanding how DEFFN works is not the same as disrobing a blushing, helpless woman. My objection is specifically about these three things in combination: 1) equating a code function to ‘damsel’, a gendered stereotype for a helpless women; 2) using phrasing that would most commonly be referencing disrobing and viewing someone; and, 3) having the characterization blush when doing so. These three components taken together are not fundamental to all characterizations. They are specific, gendered, and offensive.
- masswerk 4y agoYou are missing the fact that the scandal would be equally so, if this objectified any other gender and that objectification is the game of that trope/genre. And it's effectively not the only case of objectification in this text.